Let’s keep in mind that there have only been 4 Cotton Bowls featuring Pac-10 schools in the past 4 decades (UCLA 2x, USC, and Oregon). All of these games occurred between 1989 and 1998 back when the conference was dominated by just a few schools. I think this is an opportunity worth revisiting. I imagine that fans from most schools in the conference would welcome a trip to the CB over the Sun Bowl or even the Alamo Bowl.

]]>By: UCB-1955http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/2009/06/16/pac-10-football-my-ideal-bowl-lineup/comment-page-1/#comment-21251
Wed, 17 Jun 2009 16:16:31 +0000http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/?p=7748#comment-21251Yep. Some of the 2008 Emerald Bowl Seats had obstructed views. The demand for tickets was so great, the Emerald Bowl sold seats that they normally don’t make available. These seats were advertised as partially obstructed, and people bought them! Great fan base. Great support for the Golden Bears by the Ted Heads!
]]>By: MEG Hoopsterhttp://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/2009/06/16/pac-10-football-my-ideal-bowl-lineup/comment-page-1/#comment-21250
Wed, 17 Jun 2009 16:14:02 +0000http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/?p=7748#comment-21250Same for the Insight.com Bowl when it was played at the old Bank One Ballpark. The best seats were the temporary bleachers they set up along one of the sidelines. The regular ballpark seats had backrests & cupholders, but were positioned to watch a baseball game which didn’t lend itself perfectly to the direction of the temporary football field.
]]>By: Stanford Yappinghttp://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/2009/06/16/pac-10-football-my-ideal-bowl-lineup/comment-page-1/#comment-21249
Wed, 17 Jun 2009 15:46:08 +0000http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/?p=7748#comment-21249Went to the Emerald Bowl game with Utah, a few years back. Concur that a baseball stadium isn’t the best for football. Seats configured for the baseball field setting, and not the football field. Wish I had gone for the sideline bleacher seats.

SF is the destination city for the bowl game. Would not work well to play the game in Berkeley or Palo Alto. The Emerald Bowl is what it is, and will remain such. A bowl deserving the conference’s 4th place team.

]]>By: Bhttp://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/2009/06/16/pac-10-football-my-ideal-bowl-lineup/comment-page-1/#comment-21248
Wed, 17 Jun 2009 14:57:15 +0000http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/?p=7748#comment-21248The Emerald Bowl was awesome, I don’t know what you’re talking about or where you were sitting, but I had bleacher seats and they were great. It also drew a huge TV audience. Granted, AT&T park is not a long term solution given its capacity, but between being in SF and the TV ratings it drew, it has some things going for it. Where could you have possibly been to get an obstructed view? The park is built so every seat in the place has a good view.

A cold game in the winter, no way! Dude it’s SF, what do you expect, gotta be prepared. It’s not like it was snowing or anything, though.

It’s something I’ve been considering, and I’d like to know more about how the payouts work before conceding the point. If you could guarantee me the payouts would stay that way despite the TV ratings, and with Pac-10 fans traveling there instead of SEC/Big-12 or other closer school, than I would say that’s a great reason to want January bowl games. That said, the revenues for the payout have to come from somewhere, and I would imagine that dictates how much they pay. TV ratings and ticket sales are the two big items I can think of, and TV ratings seem to indicate playing on Jan 1. won’t be an advantage going into the future. Maybe Jan. 2 is a good strategic date, but so are some late Dec. dates. Ticket sales I would guess are mostly a product of location (proximity to schools participating, if it’s a destination city, how big/nice the stadium is). The Pac-10 has some disadvantages there, in the fact that we’re kind of isolated from the rest of the country and we don’t have a rabid SEC sized fanbase.

So I dunno if the payouts would stay the same for Pac-10 teams participating. Any thoughts or comments?

]]>By: Jacob Wanghttp://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/2009/06/16/pac-10-football-my-ideal-bowl-lineup/comment-page-1/#comment-21246
Wed, 17 Jun 2009 03:48:15 +0000http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/?p=7748#comment-21246The Emerald Bowl would probably raise its profile by moving to Stanford or Cal. Do that, and then bring on the 2nd place team in the Pac-10.
]]>By: Travishttp://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/2009/06/16/pac-10-football-my-ideal-bowl-lineup/comment-page-1/#comment-21245
Wed, 17 Jun 2009 03:10:55 +0000http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/?p=7748#comment-21245I like the Alamo and Holiday flipping 2/3 vs. 3/4 if they’re going to play the Big 12. Both are recruiting hot beds, Texas, So Cal. Almost makes it a home-road atmosphere.

Now as far as the rest of the bowls, I’ve been to the Sun, Vegas, and Emerald and how you can put the Emerald #4 is a joke. That is without a doubt the worst bowl game I’ve ever been to. Baseball stadium, obstructed views, cold, teams on the same sidelines. That is the definition of a lower tier bowl.

Keep the Sun #4. El Paso does a good job hosting and the Big East is a nice matchup not to mention a $2M payout. Vegas is in a more exciting city and it’s in a football stadium. That’s a good bowl. Beer vendors in the aisle. The Emerald, as long as it’s in a baseball stadium, hands down #6.

]]>By: Stevehttp://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/2009/06/16/pac-10-football-my-ideal-bowl-lineup/comment-page-1/#comment-21244
Wed, 17 Jun 2009 02:49:23 +0000http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/?p=7748#comment-21244I’d like to see a matchup between the PAC 10 and SEC. I am sick of hearing about how great the SEC is. Because the SEC is over rated and only play a sample of the other teams in their conference there can be more good SEC teams with 1 or no losses. In the PAC 10 there can be a max of 1 undefeated team, and only 1 one loss team. Likewise, if there is an undefeated and a 1 loss there can only be one 2 loss team since every team plays every other team. Look at the SEC schedules, the top teams typically only are tested a few times(rarely out of conference), but since the media thinks the entire 12 team conference can be a powerhouse every year they only have to prove themselves against themselves.

Everyone should make note that the PAC 10 has won significantly more games against the SEC in the last decade…and contrary to popular belief, USC has won a smaller % of these games over the SEC than LSU who has the almost all of the SEC’s wins vs. the PAC 10.